Misplaced Pages

Talk:Japan

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cultural Freedom (talk | contribs) at 17:43, 29 May 2007 (→What to call association football). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:43, 29 May 2007 by Cultural Freedom (talk | contribs) (→What to call association football)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Featured articleJapan is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 15, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 14, 2004Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 18, 2004Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 10, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 28, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
January 9, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 26, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 12, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Template:WP1.0

WikiProject iconJapan FA‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 19:48, January 13, 2025 (JST, Reiwa 7) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related
FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Japan to do list:
  • Featured content candidates – 

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Wikimedia subject-area collaboration "WP:WPC" redirects here. For the WikiProject on WikiProjects, see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council. For the editing tool, see Misplaced Pages:WPCleaner. See also Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Categories and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject China.
Project Countries main pageTalkParticipantsTemplatesArticlesPicturesTo doArticle assessmentCountries portal

This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
Shortcuts

This WikiProject helps develop country-related pages (of all types) and works toward standardizing the formats of sets and types of country-related pages. For example, the sets of Culture of x, Administrative divisions of x, and Demographics of x articles, etc. – (where "x" is a country name) – and the various types of pages, like stubs, categories, etc.

WikiProject Countries articles as of November 2, 2024

What's new?

Article alerts

Did you know

Articles for deletion

Categories for discussion

(1325 more...)

Redirects for discussion

(3 more...)

Good article nominees

Featured article reviews

Requests for comments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

Articles to be split

Articles for creation

Updated daily by AAlertBot — Discuss? / Report bug? / Request feature?
Click to watch (Subscribe via  RSS  Atom) · Find Article Alerts for other topics!

To do list

To-do list for Japan: edit · history · watch · refresh

To-do list is empty: remove {{To do}} tag or click on edit to add an item.

Scope

This WikiProject is focused on country coverage (content/gaps) and presentation (navigation, page naming, layout, formatting) on Misplaced Pages, especially country articles (articles with countries as their titles), country outlines, and articles with a country in their name (such as Demographics of Germany), but also all other country-related articles, stubs, categories, and lists pertaining to countries.

Navigation

This WikiProject helps Misplaced Pages's navigation-related WikiProjects (Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Outline of knowledge, WikiProject Categories, WikiProject Portals, etc.) develop and maintain the navigation structures (menus, outlines, lists, templates, and categories) pertaining to countries. And since most countries share the same subtopics ("Cities of", "Cuisine of", "Religion in", "Prostitution in", etc.), it is advantageous to standardize their naming, and their order of presentation in Misplaced Pages's indexes and table-of-contents-like pages.

Categories

Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
Countries
Click on "►" below to display subcategories:
WikiProject Countries

Subpages

Formatting

Many country and country-related articles have been extensively developed, but much systematic or similar information about many countries is not presented in a consistent way. Inconsistencies are rampant in article naming, headings, data presented, types of things covered, order of coverage, etc. This WikiProject works towards standardizing page layouts of country-related articles of the same type ("Geography of", "Government of", "Politics of", "Wildlife of", etc.).

We are also involved with the standardization of country-related stubs, standardizing the structure of country-related lists and categories (the category trees for countries should be identical for the most part, as most countries share the same subcategories – though there will be some differences of course).

Goals

  1. Provide a centralized resource guide of all related topics in Misplaced Pages, as well as spearhead the effort to improve and develop them.
  2. Create uniform templates that serve to identify all related articles as part of this project, as well as stub templates to englobe all related stubs under specific categories.
  3. Standardize articles about different nations, cultures, holidays, and geography.
  4. Verify historical accuracy and neutrality of all articles within the scope of the project.
  5. Create, expand and cleanup related articles.

Structure and guidelines

This section contains an essay on style, consisting of the advice or opinions of one or more WikiProjects on how to format and present article content within their area of interest.This information is not a formal Misplaced Pages policy or guideline, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.

Although referenced during FA and GA reviews, this structure guide is advisory only, and should not be enforced against the wishes of those actually working on the article in question. Articles may be best modeled on the layout of an existing article of appropriate structure and topic (See: Canada, Japan and Australia)

Main polities

Main article: Country

A country is a distinct part of the world, such as a state, nation, or other political entity. When referring to a specific polity, the term "country" may refer to a sovereign state, states with limited recognition, constituent country, or a dependent territory.

Lead section

Shortcut See also: WP:Lead section
For lead length see, #Size
Opening paragraphs
Further information: MOS:INTRO

The article should start with a good simple introduction, giving name of the country, general location in the world, bordering countries, seas and the like. Also give other names by which the country may still be known (for example Holland, Persia). Also, add a few facts about the country, the things that it is known for (for example the mentioning of windmills in the Netherlands article). The primary purpose of a Misplaced Pages lead is not to summarize the topic, but to summarize the content of the article.

First sentence
Further information: MOS:FIRST

The first sentence should introduce the topic, and tell the nonspecialist reader what the subject is, and where. It should be in plain English.

The etymology of a country's name, if worth noting and naming disputes, may be dealt with in the etymology section. Foreign-languages, pronunciations and acronyms may also belong in the etymology section or in a note to avoid WP:LEADCLUTTER.

Example:

checkY Sweden, formally the Kingdom of Sweden, is a Nordic country located on the Scandinavian Peninsula in Northern Europe.
☒N Sweden,(Swedish: Sverige ) formally the Kingdom of Sweden,(Swedish: Konungariket Sverige ) is a Nordic country located on the Scandinavian Peninsula in Northern Europe.

Detail, duplication and tangible information
Shortcut Further information: Misplaced Pages:How to create and manage a good lead section

Overly detailed information or infobox data duplication such as listing random examples, excessive numbered statistics or naming individuals should be reserved for the infobox or body of the article. The lead prose should provide clear, relevant information through links to relevant sub-articles about the country an relevant terms, rather than listing random stats and articles with minimal information about the country.

Example:

checkY A developed country, Canada has a high nominal per capita income globally and its advanced economy ranks among the largest in the world, relying chiefly upon its abundant natural resources and well-developed international trade networks. Recognized as a middle power, Canada's strong support for multilateralism and internationalism has been closely related to its foreign relations policies of peacekeeping and aid for developing countries. Canada is part of multiple international organizations and forums.
☒N A highly developed country, Canada has the seventeenth-highest nominal per-capita income globally and the sixteenth-highest ranking in the Human Development Index. Its advanced economy is the tenth-largest in the world and the 14th for military expenditure by country, Canada is part of several major international institutions including the United Nations, NATO, the G7, the Group of Ten, the G20, the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement, the Commonwealth of Nations, the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, and the Organization of American States.

Infobox

There is a table with quick facts about the country called an infobox. A template for the table can be found at the bottom of this page.

Although the table can be moved out to the template namespace (to e.g. ]) and thus easen the look of the edit page, most Wikipedians still disapprove as of now, see the talk page.

The contents are as follows:

  • The official long-form name of the country in the local language is to go on top as the caption. If there are several official names (languages), list all (if reasonably feasible). The conventional long-form name (in English), if it differs from the local long-form name, should follow the local name(s). This is not a parameter to list every recognized language of a country, but rather for listing officially recognize national languages.
  • The conventional short-form name of the country, recognised by the majority of the English-speaking world; ideally, this should also be used for the name of the article.
  • A picture of the national flag. You can find flags at the List of flags. A smaller version should be included in the table itself, a larger-sized version in a page titled Flag of <country>, linked to via the "In Detail" cell. Instead of two different images, use the autothumbnail function that wiki offers.
  • A picture of the national coat of arms. A good source is required for this, but not yet available. It should be no more than 125 pixels in width.
  • Below the flag and coat of arms is room for the national motto, often displayed on the coat of arms (with translation, if necessary).
  • The official language(s) of the country. (rot the place to list every recognized or used language)
  • The political status. Specify if it is a sovereign state or a dependent territory.
  • The capital city, or cities. Explain the differences if there are multiple capital cities using a footnote (see example at the Netherlands).
  • If the data on the population is recent and reliable, add the largest city of the country.
  • Land area: The area of the country in square kilometres (km²) and square miles (sq mi) with the world-ranking of this country. Also add the % of water, which can be calculated from the data in the Geography article (make it negligible if ~0%).
  • Population: The number of inhabitants and the world-ranking; also include a year for this estimate (should be 2000 for now, as that is the date of the ranking). For the population density you can use the numbers now available.
  • GDP: The amount of the gross domestic product on ppp base and the world ranking. also include the amount total and per head.
  • HDI: Information pertaining to the UN Human Development Index – the value, year (of value), rank (with ordinal), and category (colourised as per the HDI country list).
  • Currency; the name of the local currency. Use the pipe if the currency name is also used in other countries: ].
  • Time zone(s); the time zone or zones in which the country is relative to UTC
  • National anthem; the name of the National anthem and a link to the article about it.
  • Internet TLD; the top-level domain code for this country.
  • Calling Code; the international Calling Code used for dialing this country.
Lead map

There is a long-standing practice that areas out of a state's control should be depicted differently on introductory maps, to not give the impression the powers of a state extend somewhere they do not. This is for various types of a lack of control, be it another state (eg. Crimea, bits of Kashmir) or a separatist body (eg. DPR, TRNC).

Sections

Further information: Misplaced Pages:Summary style and Misplaced Pages:Too much detail Shortcut

A section should be written in summary style, containing just the important facts. Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to the depth of detail, the quantity of text, prominence of placement, the juxtaposition of statements, and the use of imagery. Main article fixation is an observed effect that editors are likely to encounter in county articles. If a section it is too large, information should be transferred to the sub-article. Avoid sections focusing on criticisms or controversies. Try to achieve a more neutral text by folding debates into the narrative, rather than isolating them into sections.

Prose should provide clear, relevant information and links to relevant sub-articles about the country, rather than listing random stats and articles with minimal information about the country.

checkY Corruption in Liberia is endemic at every level of society, making it one of the most politically corrupt nations.
☒N Liberia scored a 3.3 on a scale from 10 (highly clean) to 0 (highly corrupt) on the 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index.


Comparison table of section sizes in country articles as a percentage of article size. Click image for latest data.

Articles may consist of the following sections:

  • Etymology sections are often placed first (sometimes called name depending on the information in the article). Include only if due information is available.
  • History – An outline of the major events in the country's history (about 4 to 6 paragraphs, depending on complexity of history), including some detail on current events. Sub-article: "History of X"
  • Politics – Overview of the current governmental system, possibly previous forms, some short notes on the parliament. Sub-article: "Politics of X"
  • Administrative divisions – Overview of the administrative subdivisions of the country. Name the section after the first level of subdivisions (and subsequent levels, if available) (e.g. provinces, states, departments, districts, etc.) and give the English equivalent name, when available. Also include overseas possessions. This section should also include an overview map of the country and subdivisions, if available.
  • Geography – Details of the country's main geographic features and climate. Historical weather boxes should be reserved for sub articles. Sub-article: "Geography of X"
  • Economy – Details on the country's economy, major industries, bit of economic history, major trade partners, a tad comparison etc. Sub-article: "Economy of X"
  • Demographics – Mention the languages spoken, the major religions, some well known properties of the people of X, by which they are known. Uncontextualized data and charts should be avoided. (See WP:NOTSTATS and WP:PROSE) Sub-article: "Demographics of X".
  • Culture – Summary of the country's specific forms of art (anything from painting to film) and its best known cultural contributions. Caution should be taken to ensure that the sections are not simply a listing of names or mini biographies of individuals accomplishments. Good example Canada#Sports. Sub-article: "Culture of X".
  • See also – 'See also" sections of country articles normally only contain links to "Index of country" and "Outline of country" articles, alongside the main portal(s).
  • References – Sums up "Notes", "References", and all "Further Reading" or "Bibliography"
  • External links – Links to official websites about the country. See WP:External links
Size
Graphic showing article quality, size, contentiousness, protection, and vital level. Click for live data.
Shortcut Main pages: Misplaced Pages:Article size and Misplaced Pages:Summary style § Article size
Articles that have gone through FA and GA reviews generally consists of approximately 8,000 to 10,000 words as per WP:SIZERULE, with a lead usually 250 to 400 words as per MOS:LEADLENGTH.
  • Australia = Prose size (text only): 60 kB (9,304 words) "readable prose size"
  • Bulgaria = Prose size (text only): 56 kB (8,847 words) "readable prose size"
  • Canada = Prose size (text only): 67 kB (9,834 words) "readable prose size"
  • Germany = Prose size (text only): 54 kB (8,456 words) "readable prose size"
  • Japan = Prose size (text only): 51 kB (8,104 words) "readable prose size"
  • East Timor = Prose size (text only): 53 kB (8,152 words) "readable prose size"
  • Malaysia = Prose size (text only): 57 kB (9,092 words) "readable prose size"
  • New Zealand = Prose size (text only): 62 kB (9,761 words) "readable prose size"
  • Philippines = Prose size (text only): 62 kB (9,178 words) "readable prose size"
Hatnote

The link should be shown as below: Avoid link clutter of multiple child articles in a hierarchical setup as hatnotes. Important links/articles should be incorporated into the prose of the section. For example, Canada#Economy is a summary section with a hatnote to Economy of Canada that summarizes the history with a hatnote to Economic history of Canada. See WP:SUMMARYHATNOTE, WP:HATNOTERULES, WP:HATLENGTH for more recommended hatnote usages.

checkY== Economy ==

Main article: Economy of Canada

☒N== Economy ==

Main article: Economy of Canada

See also: Petroleum industry in Canada and Agriculture in Canada

Further information: Economic history of Canada and Early Canadian banking system

Charts

Shortcut

As prose text is preferred, overly detailed statistical charts and diagrams that lack any context or explanation such as; economic trends, weather boxes, historical population charts, and past elections results, etc, should be reserved for main sub articles on the topic as per WP:DETAIL as outlined at WP:NOTSTATS.

Galleries

Shortcut

Galleries or clusters of images are generally discouraged as they may cause undue weight to one particular section of a summary article and may cause accessibility problems, such as sand­wich­ing of text, images that are too small or fragmented image display for some readers as outlined at WP:GALLERY. Articles that have gone through modern FA and GA reviews generally consists of one image for every three or four paragraph summary section, see MOS:ACCESS#FLOAT and MOS:SECTIONLOC for more information.

Footers

As noted at Misplaced Pages:Categories, lists, and series boxes the number of templates at the bottom of any article should be kept to a minimum. Country pages generally have footers that link to pages for countries in their geographic region. Footers for international organizations are not added to country pages, but they rather can go on subpages such as "Economy of..." and "Foreign relations of..." Categories for some of these organizations are also sometimes added. Templates for supranational organizations like the European Union and CARICOM are permitted. A list of the footers that have been created can be found at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Countries/Templates/Navboxes, however note that many of these are not currently in use.

Transclusions

Transclusions are generally discouraged in country articles for reasons outlined below.

This section is transcluded from Help:Transclusion. (edit | history) Shortcut Further information: Misplaced Pages:Transclusion costs and benefits

Like many software technologies, transclusion comes with a number of drawbacks. The most obvious one being the cost in terms of increased machine resources needed; to mitigate this to some extent, template limits are imposed by the software to reduce the complexity of pages. Some further drawbacks are listed below.

Lists of countries

To determine which entities should be considered separate "countries" or included on lists, use the entries in ISO 3166-1 plus the list of states with limited recognition, except:

  • Lists based on only a single source should follow that source.
  • Specific lists might need more logical criteria. For example, list of sovereign states omits non-sovereign entities listed by ISO-3166-1. Lists of sports teams list whichever entities that have teams, regardless of sovereignty. Lists of laws might follow jurisdiction boundaries (for example, England and Wales is a single jurisdiction).

For consistency with other Misplaced Pages articles, the names of entities do not need to follow sources or ISO-3166-1. The names used as the titles of English Misplaced Pages articles are a safe choice for those that are disputed.

Resources

Sisterlinks

Related WikiProjects

Popular pages

Notes

  1. Swedish: Sverige ; Finnish: Ruotsi; Meänkieli: Ruotti; Northern Sami: Ruoŧŧa; Lule Sami: Svierik; Pite Sami: Sverji; Ume Sami: Sverje; Southern Sami: Sveerje or Svöörje; Yiddish: שוועדן, romanized: Shvedn; Scandoromani: Svedikko; Kalo Finnish Romani: Sveittiko.
  2. Swedish: Konungariket Sverige
Misplaced Pages key policies and guidelines (?)
Content (?)
P
G
Conduct (?)
P
G
Deletion (?)
P
Enforcement (?)
P
Editing (?)
P
G
Style
Classification
Project content (?)
G
WMF (?)
P
 WikiProject Council
 WikiProject guides
 Directories and summaries
 Culture and the arts
 Geographical
 History and society
 Science, technology
and engineering
 Misplaced Pages assistance
and tasks
Misplaced Pages help pages
About Misplaced Pages (?)
Help for readers (?)
Contributing
to Misplaced Pages (?)
Getting started (?)
Dos and don'ts (?)
How-to pages and
information pages (?)
Coding (?)
Directories (?)
Missing Manual
Ask for help on your talk page (?)
Archiving icon
Archives
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21

yes]


The most prestigious universities in Japan

The most prestigious universities in Japan are the University of Tokyo, Keio University, and Waseda University. I think that this is an elite university of not the elite university in Japan but Tokyo. (Graduates at Kyoto University are famous because a lot of Nobel prize was won. ) If it is possible, will you delete this part? This has the possibility of making the graduate of other universities revolted.　--Azukimonaka 04:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Azukimonaka that this sentence is flat-out wrong. And the cited source merely says:
  • "The most prestigious national university is the University of Tokyo (founded in 1877); two well-known private universities are Keio University (1858) and Waseda University (1882)."
The source doesn't even say that Waseda and Keio are "prestigious", only that they're "famous".
Based on The Times Higher Education Supplement from 2004 , we have the following rankings for Japanese universities, among the world's top 200:
So Tokyo University is obviously number 1 by any standard. Kyoto University appears to be number 2 by any standard also. Opinion usually varies as to who is number 3 (, 4, and 5) in Japan. For example, I've heard Hitotsubashi University being ranked number 3 before.--Endroit 10:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
See also ja:名門大学 (meimon daigaku). Tokyo University and Kyoto University are listed there AT THE BEGINING of their short list of prestigious Japanese universities. I am declaring that Tokyo University & Kyoto University deserve mention in the "Japan" article, but Waseda University & Keio University do not.--Endroit 11:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Having a source makes this an easy fix. We can say that "According to The Times Higher Education Supplement (2004) the three top-ranking universities in Japan are ... ." This avoids attributing the prestige ranking to Misplaced Pages and attributes it to the source. I suggest three universities (but other numbers are possible). Fg2 10:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Fg2, just in case there are any NPOV concerns, I don't think we should mention number 3 and beyond. Numbers 1 & 2 appear to be undisputed. And yes, we should use "The Times..." as the source.--Endroit 11:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
No problem with just two. BTW, along with prestige, there are other viewpoints: public/private universities, old universities, universities from which prominent people graduate (elected politicians, elite bureaucrats, company presidents, innovators, researchers ... the list goes on ... ) so a short or very short list, especially if multiple sources agree, seems prudent. Fg2 11:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, I made the change. Please feel free to correct me if I missed something.--Endroit 11:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Here's another ranking, from Asiaweek.com's "Asia's Best Universities" in the year 2000 :
--Endroit 11:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Question about info box

The info box has an entry "Capital (and conurbation (population)) Tokyo 35°41′N 139°46′E"

The left column promises population but the right column delivers longitude and latitude. Anyone know how to remedy this? Fg2 08:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

See Template:Infobox Country/doc. The right column shows what it is supposed to show. The problem is that the text of left column is misleading. Change or remove the "largest_settlement_type" parameter. I suggest removing it; then the entry becomes "Capital (and largest city) Tokyo 35°41′N 139°46′E". --Kusunose 09:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Done. If I've removed information that belongs in the box, please help us fix it. Thanks Fg2 09:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Lower courts in the Japanese judicial system

HongQiKong re-introduced 3 red links in this edit as follows....

HongQiKong says in the edit comment: "The United States has these articles, so I'm wikilinking for future development as well. Please see Category:Judicial branch of the United States government."

I disagree. The lower courts within the Japanese judicial system are not nearly as important as for the United States. New articles for them are NOT warranted. How many FA status articles have links to LOWER COURTS of that nation? Please do not create red links for the lower courts again, because those lower courts are utterly unimportant with respect to Japan as a whole.--Endroit 16:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Endroit. Hong please do not start stuffing these red-links in while we're trying to resolve FAC blocking issues - no one other than you seems worried about a lack of these court links, so I can't see it as a priority right now. John Smith's 16:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
At the least, surely district courts and summary courts are notable. There are only 50 and 9 of them, respectively. If FA status articles do not have links to lower courts, then that's probably because they don't even make mention of them. So maybe we need to take out mention of the lower courts. How many FA status articles do that? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Hong, please just leave it - let us deal with citations problems which are far more serious. This is something that can be discussed another time. John Smith's 16:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

From now on, please do not move pictures unless you can stop your "space" problems and it keeps them together. When people have said they've "fixed" that problem, it just creates another in that you get a couple of lines of text stuck between the pictures. It's better as it is, I believe. John Smith's 16:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Hong, please stop. Take screenshots and identify where these "spaces" are - we can't see any. John Smith's 16:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
What resolution does HongQiGong have anyways? I have 1152 x 864, and it's fine after we moved the buddha to the left. We should ask somebody like Kusunose for a third opinion regarding the white spaces. I think HongQiGong should lay off until we get more opinion on this.
Also, I'm troubled that HongQiGong appears to be resorting to . If he couldn't introduce red links for the lower courts (see above), he just deletes any mention of them.--Endroit 16:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Here's a screenshot - Image:Jpnscrnsht.JPG. My screen resolution is 1280x1024. Anything bigger than 800x600 gives me blank spaces. And I'm not exactly the only one that sees these blank spaces. User:Aaron Bowen has mentioned them in the FAC also.

And please, Endroit. That's not a bad faith edit. You made a good point that FA status country articles may not necessary name the lower courts. So I got rid of their mention. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I had a look at a higher resolution, and I can see them. But I'm fine on 1024x800 with IE7 and my current browser. I think we should ask Raul654 what to do. John Smith's 16:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The most recent version at the time of my writing this comment has gotten rid of one of the blank spaces, but another one remains below the Yayoi section and above the Book of Han section. Look, since I can see the blank spaces and you can't, just let me know if you want me to fix them instead of reverting my changes without question. I can't be taking a screen shot for you every time you make a blind stab at fixing these things. And If I can see them, I'm sure others can also. This is a major violation of WP:MOS and an obstacle to FA status. Despite what you and Endroit may think, I'm trying to help. A little good faith might be nice. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I had another look and I can confirm it's only IE that has the gaps. I know what you're saying, it's just a shame if we have to separate the pictures just because Microsoft can't string a decent piece of code together. Can you try something other than separating the pictures - like moving them down or something? John Smith's 16:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
If it was up to me, I'd get rid of some of the pictures. There are too many in the history section. (And I did see your comment about IE before you edited it. Don't worry, it's not like I have some misguided pride in being an IE user.) Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Well if comes down to having sandwiched text and one less picture, I say get rid of the picture. As I said why don't you try to see whether you can get rid of the gaps by moving the pictures down together or realigning the Buddha. If you can't make it work, delete the Buddha. Ok?
As to IE, well can't you migrate? We can solve this problem, but it's better in the long-run in my opinion. By the way I edited because I didn't want to give the impression I was saying "we're not changing - you get new software". :)John Smith's 16:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Just wanted to leave a note here to make sure I'm not ignoring you, but I need to get offline for now. I'll be back in a few hours. Yeah, IE is not the best browser, but like it or not, it being used by the majority of the web browsing population, it's used (or should be used) as the litmus test for browser experience. And I'm not talking about WP, I'm talking about web development in general. If your site does not work well on IE, expect to lose a lot of readers. Anyway, I'll be back. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
On HongQiGong's screen shot (Image:Jpnscrnsht.JPG), the upper gap still remains. (The lower gap was eliminated). The Buddha being on the right had a huger gap, and that's what everybody was complaining about before. We're better off now with the buddha being on the left, as shown on this screen shot. I'd be curious to see if that small gap is acceptable enough for FA purposes, since it's less noticeable now.--Endroit 17:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry it took me so long to come back online. I made a minor change to the image positioning. See how it looks on your own individual browsers. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It looks fine on both IE 6.0 and Firefox 1.0.7 at 1024×768. Many thanks for this ray of hope! Fg2 07:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Looks fine, thanks. John Smith's 12:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Looks fine at 1152 x 864, as well.--Endroit 23:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Science and Technology

I know the article is quite big already, but do you think a short mention of the HII A spy satellites in the science and tech section could work? --WoodElf 12:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I mean H-IIA --WoodElf 12:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
If they are properly referenced, of course. I do mean that - please don't add anything in without appropriately formatted citations - I have enough to find right now. Thanks, John Smith's 15:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Right-facing Daibutsu

The move of the photo of the Daibutsu to the left results in the statue facing the margin instead of the text. If you want a right-facing photo I suggest Image:NaraTodaijiDaibutsu0212.jpg. Fg2 10:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Population

There exists an estimate for 2007 in following the link next to the old 2005 estimate. If someone would update it.24.77.65.236 21:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Request

For in Foreign policy and military

Japan has several territorial disputes with its neighbors: with Russia over the Kuril Islands, with South Korea over Dokdo (Takeshima), with China and Taiwan over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyutai Islands), and with China over the status of Okinotorishima. These disputes are in part about the control of marine and natural resources, such as possible reserves of crude oil and natural gas.

Senkaku Islands has subterranean resources. However, Kuril islands amd Takeshima do not have subterranean resources. I request this part to be deleted.

　 These disputes are in part about the control of marine and natural resources, such as possible reserves of crude oil and natural gas.

--Azukimonaka 11:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Re-read it. It says marine and natural resources such as... - with the other islands fishing rights comes into it (fishing = marine resources). So I am reinserting it. John Smith's 09:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
It is a sentence that induces the misunderstanding. Senkaku Islands has subterranean resources. Please explain the reason why you enhance a part of problem to all problems. --Azukimonaka 10:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I can't speak for John Smith's or anyone else, but I see this as simply a matter of this being a broad overview article which should take the stance of discussing issues in general, not in minute detail. The point here is not to single out Okinotorishima (which I've never even heard of) and to go into detail about that particular issue, but to summarize territorial disputes in general. Most if not all of the territorial disputes Japan is involved in involve some kind of marine or natural resources - we're not talking about only subterranean resources, or only about oil and natural gas, but rather resources in general - land, fishing, maybe lumber, I don't know, whatever it is that these various islands have. The use of the term "such as", provides an example, and does not share these problems around all the different disputes. LordAmeth 09:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I oppose such a negligent description.
  • As for the administrative power of Kuril islands, Japan was stopped by Treaty of San Francisco. However, Russia is not participating in this agreement.
  • Japan doesn't agree to this declaration at all though Takeshima declared Syngman Rhee line in 1956 to be a Korean territory.
I think that I should not lack the incorrect information. Please let me hear your opinion.
I request this part to be deleted again.

　 These disputes are in part about the control of marine and natural resources, such as possible reserves of crude oil and natural gas.

--Azukimonaka 19:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Botched declarations and unclear wording in treaties are nothing unusual. What is unusual is for nations to claim territories based on the value of the seas surrounding them. Anyways, therefore, I reworded the text in question into the following:
  • These disputes are in part about the control of natural resources, which include possible reserves of crude oil and natural gas, or fishery/marine resources within the surounding waters.
--Endroit 19:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I am Japanese. Therefore, I regret the misunderstanding of the territorial issue. I take a rest before it gets excited. thank you --Azukimonaka 20:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

New or no picture for government

Is there not a better picture to represent the government? I find it odd and almost disturbing having two photos of President Bush in both sections of Japanese politics, side by side. Some people might enjoy GW photo-ops, but that's one too many photos for an article not about the US. falsedef 10:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Falsedef, I think what we're seeing is that it's easy to find photos from US government sources, and if they're official works of the government they're in the public domain. So some editors were able to locate those two photos and they posted them. Do you know of any sources for photos, with appropriate licenses, of leaders of the government of Japan? They'd be valuable additions, and might well replace one or both of the pictures presently in the article. Fg2 10:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I've guessed as much that the pictures were posted due to US government archives accessibility. I'd really only like to see one photo replaced. Specifically, the first one seems less descriptive. Both photos are good alone, but in the context of the article itself, two photos of the same foreign president doesn't seem appropriate. diet photos, offices, sdf, diet building falsedef 02:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

As you can see, Japan has reached FA status. Thanks for those who supported it through the nomination process.

There is always room for improvement, such as ensuring data is the most recent available. However please always remember to update information with new, properly formatted citations from reliable sources.

Thanks again, John Smith's 11:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

sorry, when i gave my reasons why i didn't actively support it, it had been fixed but i forgot to change it to support. Anyways congrats to everyone's hard work. -ScotchMB 23:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for featuring Japan as a Featured Article...this is one of my favorite articles on Misplaced Pages! -Surferman32

WOOOOO-HOOOOOOOO!!!! YES! YES! I've always wanted this!! Brutannica 18:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Once again, I'm so glad this article was featured on the Misplaced Pages. This is one of the best articles on Misplaced Pages. The pictures go along very well with the text...I hope this article will be up on the homepage again soon. -Surferman32

Complaint

I would like to know what the language in japan is. But it never stated it. I just thought that that was important. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.241.105.45 (talk) 14:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

You will notice that language is listed in the infobox on the right side at the top of the article. Unlike some countries with much more complex political/cultural/ethnic and therefore linguistic histories, Japan has always enjoyed a relative stability and unity of language under the umbrella of dialects, slang, etc know as the Japanese language. LordAmeth 22:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Japan has not "always enjoyed unity". There's Ainu, several Ryukyuan languages, languages brought to Japan by immigrants like Chinese and English, as well as special developments like Bamboo English, and of course Japanese Sign Language. --Ptcamn 07:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Let's throw in all the Trekies who speak Klingon too, while we're at it...-Jefu 10:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
The >1 million speakers of Ryukyuan languages, 670,000 speakers of Korean in Japan, and 320,000 signers of JSL can't really be compared to the handful of people who speak Klingon. Ainu is nearly extinct today, but it was not always so. --Ptcamn 10:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Although for a featured article you'd think someone would have fixed the grammar error at the beginning. "Japan comprises over three thousand islands" is wrong. It should be "Over three thousand islands comprise Japan." The many always comprise the collective and never the other way around. 65.209.165.170 14:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Mount Fuji as an island?

"Most of the islands are mountainous, many volcanic, including Japan’s highest peak, Mount Fuji."

this is in the intro. Not sure if it's ambiguous or misleading? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.161.46.25 (talk) 03:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

"Second-Largest Economy"

Thought it might be prudent to mention, in the introductory paragraph to the "Japan" article, that Japan is the world's third-largest if using purchasing-power parity (see IMF website, CIA World Factbook). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Iso2204 (talk • contribs) 19:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

Japan has moved from second to third in recent months and I think this article should now be updated to reflect this. Whats up skip 06:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Statistics are never a simple - "Japan become the second largest economy in the world, after the United States, at around US$4.5 trillion in terms of nominal GDP and third after the United States and China in terms of purchasing power parity.". Thus at the moment it is a definition issue, so I have not changed this. Whats up skip 22:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Name

There needs to be a ==Name of Japan== section, explaining where Japan and Nihon come from, and other names that were/are used (Yamato, Wagakuni, etc). I'd do it myself but I don't have sources to cite. --Ptcamn 07:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

There's a whole article on it. Click the link in the lead paragraph. Fg2 11:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Whoops! Missed that.
Still, it would be clearer if there was a summary on this page, with {{main}} linking to Names of Japan. --Ptcamn 11:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

How many islands?

Someone insists that it is 6,000, whereas wikipedia articles generally say 3,000. I have found search results for both, so can someone supply a definitive source on this issue? John Smith's 11:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

"Over 3,000" would be the correct description, per this major Japanese dictionary definition of "Japanese archipelago".
If you wish to cite it, you can do it as follows....
{{cite web |
| title = ''Nihon Rettō'' (にほんれっとう［―れつたう］ 【日本列島】)
| url = http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%AB%E3%81%BB%E3%82%93%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8%E3%81%86&dtype=0&stype=1&dname=0ss
| publisher = ] / Yahoo Japan dictionary
| accessdate = 2007-05-07 }}
--Endroit 21:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the citation - added to the article. John Smith's 21:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The Japanese Misplaced Pages article says 6,852, and it's not a recent addition to the article. I'm sure I once saw something on a Japanese government web site. I might have listed it on this talk page -- if so, it would be in the archives. Fg2 21:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I have searched Japanese government web sites with Google (6852 islands site:go.jp and 6852 島 site:go.jp). According to them, 6,852 is a number of islands with a length of coastline of 0.1 km and over. --Kusunose 06:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Any idea how the 3000 figure defined the size of those islands? Also does wikipedia have any "guidance" on the "minimum" size of an island? John Smith's 22:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Need Some Help?

Hi! I'm a newcomer. Feeling like a stranger in a strange land or should I say I'm helpless as a kitten up a tree? I'm not sure I could be a helper. But just try and ask me. I'm a native Japanese, working as a translator. Oda Mari 16:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Foreign policy&Military

  • The following things does not Fair
  • 1)Image Manupulation
  • Japan have border probrem but 1945-1952 SK& Russia Military Occupy Japanese Islands because at that time she could not defend herself, and Japan proposed SK Peaceful solution at court but SK rejected it. And regarding senkaku After 1971 Oil reserve found China/Taiwan suddenly decleare that the island belongs to them.
  • Even all these case Japan is a VICTIM, but the article Just Indicate "HEY JAPAN IS A TROUBLE MAKER SHE DESPUTE WITH ALL NEIGHBORS" it is Not fair and it is NOT American way.
  • 2)Hiding Truth
  • NK Aiming 200 Rodong Missile to Japan. And US analyst comented that 3 of it Loaded Nuke Warhead=NK can Nuke TOKYO. Why hide the truth is this the way of Democrats?
  • Total amount of Omoiyari Yosan donation is equivalant Value of 22 Nuke Aircraft carriers, why hide this truth and Propaganda Free Rider? --202.239.229.7 00:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.239.229.7 (talk) 23:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

Hey, I want to know what the national flower for Japan is? But I cant find it :( Also what is the most important food?

External Links

I think we need to add some additional links to better maps. The Wikimedia Atlas of Japan is good, but if you are trying to find anything other than large cities then it will not help. I suggest that we need a link to either the Yahoo! maps site or the mashup version found at http://www.japaneselifestyle.com.au/travel/japan_map.html as this map allows the user to zoom into a good level of detail.

I don't think that Encyclopaedia Britannica or the Guardian Unlimited links should be included. They are not specialist sites on Japan and they are just as commercial as many other sites that have far more detailed information and probably just as accurate. Whats up skip 06:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

That's a ridiculous justification. The Guardian is a respected broadsheet newspaper, so unless you can show its information is wrong then I strongly disagree. John Smith's 23:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I see now you've been spamming links from the same website around. That is not a good link to put in. I certainly hope you are not from that website - your Australian-esque alias doesn't help. I suggest you stop putting in to Japan-related articles. John Smith's 23:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Request Article Protection

This article keeps getting vandalized every few seconds or so and starts up again after a protection period expires. Maybe someone should add a PERNAMENT one to prevent randon people completely wasting the time of others and throwing off anybody reading the article. Discuss. --Eiyuu Kou 16:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I will protect it for now--let's say, for a week--but you might want to go to WP:RFPP to request something more permanent. I'm not sure how many articles have a "permanent" semi-protected status (George W. Bush comes to mind) but I don't think that's an unreasonable request. Have any anons made good edits recently? Antandrus (talk) 17:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, thanks Sean--you read my mind. LOL. I was just about to do it. Antandrus (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I've beaten you to it, Antandrus :). I have semi-protected the page for one week, per a request at WP:RFPP Sean William 17:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

"great power"?

Is it correct to call Japan a "great power"? The article cites Paul Kennedy's The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. Skimming this book, it seems that Japan isn't a great power according to Kennedy's definition ("a state capable of holding its own against any other nation", p.539) in the military sense. Misplaced Pages defines it as "a nation or state that, through its great economic, political and military strength, is able to exert power over world diplomacy." Japan definitely is a great economic power, but not a political nor military one. In any event, "great power" is a highly subjective term and Japan's inclusion seems iffy at best. I think "great power" should be removed from the article or at least should be explicitly be attributed to Paul Kennedy as in "According to Paul Kennedy, Japan is a 'great power'", although I don't think he ever says anything of the sort about modern Japan. --dm 21:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it is correct to call Japan a "great power". Quite apart from its economic strength, it has built a significant military capability and has political clout too. John Smith's 21:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

On military power, it is known that Japan's military is larger then Great Britain, and is also signifcantly advanced.

Well, according to the relevant articles, Japan's military is about half the size & 2/3rds the spending of Britain. So, no, it's not larger than the U.K. Still, it's much larger than I had thought, so I stand corrected. --dm 17:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

What to call association football

I have just changed the following sentence.


“ Since the establishment of a professional soccer league in Japan in 1992, football has also gained a wide following. ”

I have changed the football to soccer. I believe that such a change is justified for the following reasons.

  1. It's bad style & potentially confusing to use two different names refer to the one thing (except in special cases) - particularly in the one sentence.
  2. The article obviously uses American English. This is true for both the current version and the original version (or at least the earliest version I can find). In American English the sport is called soccer.
  3. Football is an ambiguous term (it could mean soccer, rugby, Aussie rules, American football, etc.). Such a term would require qualification.

Although it should not really qualify as a reason it might also be noted that the Japanese name for the sport is "サッカー" which is a transliteration of "soccer". Jimp 05:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I changed both back to football, so that gets rid of the problem of using two terms.
As to the J. League, look at their official website. They use the term "Japan Professional Football League" - the word soccer isn't there.
Also football is about, well, football. If you're talking about something else, you're talking about something else. What is the more commonly used word around the world - football or soccer? I think it's the first. John Smith's 11:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
"both back to football"? One had been soccer. "that gets rid of the problem of using two terms", no, technically the problem had already been got rid of. As to the J. League, let them use whichever term they like, we're under no obligation to follow their lead here.
Yeah, football is about, football. It's an ambiguous term: what one person means by it can differ from what the next person means by it. We don't all speak the same dialect. A person from New York will think American football when you say "football" but a person from Sydney will think rugby league. Go on, prove us wrong.
"What is the more commonly used word around the world ..." what does this matter? But since you ask, do you mean in English or do you include cognates in other languages? If it's the latter, keep in mind that the Japanese name for the sport is "サッカー" (sakkaa). But, no, this is the English Misplaced Pages so other languages don't matter ... not even Japanese. So what is the more commonly used word in English around the world? I think it's the second ... not that this matters.
Nor have you addresses my second point that the article uses American English - just check through the spelling. Calling soccer football in this context is not consistant.
P.S. re: your edit summary: "both articles use the word 'football', not soccer" - This is an irrelevant point. The ] calls for consistancy within but not across articles.
Jimp 17:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Jimp's right. Japan prefers American English forms, and the Japanese term for the sport is a katakanazation of the word soccer, not football. The best idea is to probably list both terms to avoid ambiguity, though, and this is what I have done. — Brian (talk) 00:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I do not accepted Jimp's arguments about the J. League. They know better than us what term they want to use. And if they use the word football then I think we should respect that.
Yes, Japan does use the word "sakkaa", but that doesn't mean the word "soccer" must be used either. As I have said above, if the J. League refers to itself with the word "football" then that is the word that should be used to describe the league. As to mentioning the sport, then of course the most common term should be used first. The article is primarily for the benefit of English-speaking users, not Japanese.
Also, Brian, just because Japan might prefer American-English does not mean it should be used all the time especially if the association or whatever uses a specific term. John Smith's 12:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
There appears to be confusion about our English guideline. Generally if an article is about one location, we use the form of English used locally. English in Japan may be more similar to American English then Commonwealth English. But this doesn't mean it's the same as American English. If the Japanese generally refer to it as football locally, then that's what we use. Besides that, the term soccer is (sadly) sometimes preferred in Commonwealth countries anyway e.g. New Zealand and Australia. Nil Einne 17:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, as an English teacher in the place, I can tell you that all of the text books (the ones I'm asked to use anyway) are written in American English and refer to the sport as soccer. :) — Brian (talk) 22:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
If the same term has to be used in the article, I changed "soccer (football)" to "football (soccer)". That way the same term is used, the league uses the correct word and the sport itself has mention of both. John Smith's 11:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
The J. League "know better than us what term they want to use." It's hard to refute that, however, aren't we discussing what term we want to use? We are not obliged to use the term someone else has chosen. Note that the current wording is "a professional Japanese football league" not "the Japan Professional Football League" ... this makes all the difference since we're not free to change someone else's proper noun.
"The article is primarily for the benefit of English-speaking users, not Japanese. ... just because Japan might prefer American-English does not mean it should be used all the time" you also write. Yes, I agree here. The facts that most Japanese tend to prefer American English and that the sport is called "sakkaa" are side-points. This is the English Misplaced Pages. Japan is not an English-speaking country.
So let's, then get our perspective right: we are writing an article about a topic with no particular connexion to any English dialect. However, do note that most English speakers call the sport "soccer" and would find the term football (without qualification) either ambiguous or misleading. This includes a good number of people from Commonwealth countries and being one of them myself I don't feel sad about it in least. "As to mentioning the sport," you write, John, "then of course the most common term should be used first." In that case soccer should come first.
Then, what dialect should we be using here? Let's have a look at the policy. Okay, I had claimed that the article used American English. The version I edited did. As did the oldest version I could find. At the moment we just have inconsistancy - this, of course, should be fixed as per WP:MOS but that's another issue. Jɪmp 16:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Since when do most English-speakers use "soccer"? You mean Americans. Maybe you could tell me what the full title of FIFA is, or indeed why the main wikipedia entry is "football" and not soccer. John Smith's 17:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Since when? I don't know off the top of my head but I guess it's been a while. Yes, I mean Americans ... and Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, ... Maybe I could tell you what FIFA's full title is. That'd be easy. As for the other thing ... I'm not about to dig into the archives regarding that. I do wonder why it matters. Jɪmp 17:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
You've forgotten other English-speakers, such as those from other Commonwealth countries as well as other people who speak English. Football is easily the most common term used around the world. John Smith's 17:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Have I? But the question at hand is what dialect this article is written in ... and hodge-podge is not a viable option. Jɪmp 17:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Well you have, unless you want to claim the Commonwealth is only made up of the UK, Canada, Australia and NZ when it comes to English-speaking states.....
Currently it looks like it's written in International/British English to me. John Smith's 17:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
When it comes to native English speakers ... with neighbours & neighbouring alongside modeled & practiced it currently looks like a hodge-podge to me. Jɪmp 18:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Ignoring the overwhelming grammar style, but never mind - that's been rectified. Got anything else? John Smith's 18:13, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, the article still uses American dollars. Jɪmp 18:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
That's because the figures supplied (from citations) are in US dollars, apart from those converted from Yen. Also the US dollar is a standard when it comes to expressing budgets, size of economies, etc. That has nothing to do with spelling or grammar. For example this article uses US dollars, as do similar ones on the global economy. John Smith's 18:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Behold, now the article is in British English, looks like I've got no argument any more and we can all go away happy. Jɪmp 18:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC) - P.S. I was just having a go with the USD comment, though yen values would be worth including. Jɪmp 19:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Excellent..................... 19:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, until somebody
He didn't "revert it back," he undid John Smith's spelling vandalism, which itself was a continuation of John Smith's reversions of a sincere editor's attempts to follow policy by making the article consistent. (It was ~98% American English, someone made it 100%, and John Smith mindlessly, orthographically imperialistically, reverted the edits.) --Cultural Freedom talk 2007-05-29 17:43 17:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Well that's about spelling, not the actual words to be used. I think it would be more productive if we simply moved on and found other things to do. Though that page isn't binding, only offering suggestions. John Smith's 06:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Whether it's about spelling and not the actual words being used is debateable. In fact it really isn't clear. There is an emphasis on spelling but the section does refer to usage, punctuation and grammar as well as differing versions, forms and varieties of English. I think I'll bring the point up on the talk page. No, it's not absolutely binding and is only offering suggestions but the note at the top of the page does say "Misplaced Pages articles should heed these guidelines." Consider, also, the spirit in which those suggestions were written. It is jarring to the reader to have a haphazard mix of different dialects - this is true whether we be talking only of spelling or whether we be also referring to vocabulary. I don't feel that any good reason has been put forth to go against this. As for moving on, I had, I haven't touched the page since I made my original edit. I do wonder, John, whether you'd be suggesting we move on if the page had soccer rather than football. Jɪmp 07:04, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't find it jarring, which is why I originally didn't mind the American English spelling - I only changed it after you made your earlier point.
The very reason I suggested we "move on" was because you weren't editing the phrase back. However if you aren't satisfied you can always start a RFC/straw poll. John Smith's 08:20, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Well it had been edited back but that didn't last and I wasn't about to get involved in a war over it. Okay, how about the following as a kind of compromise?
Since the establishment of the ] in 1992, ] has also gained a wide following.
This way the first instance refers to the name of the organisation, we are no longer mentioning the sport directly so gone is the question of what to call it here. In the second instance we use the full name of the sport which is unambiguous and should not be too strange regardless of what dialect you speak (it does take somewhat a formal register but this is not inappropriate for an encyclopædia). The common short form of the sport's name is included for those unfamiliar with the full name and we have the word football appearing twice. Jɪmp 09:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't have a problem with that at all. John Smith's 09:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Wrong flag!

Hey, it's the Canadian flag! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.22.4.101 (talk) 10:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

This page seems to be very active. The whole first paragraph was edited to "Japan is ( *stuf* ) bullshit" this morning when a friend noticed. I was going to undo but I think someone beat me to it. Going through the history is kinda amusing too :) 81.215.13.145 12:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


WRONG INFORMATION!!!!!

I have just realized this, but Tokyo as a 'city' does not exist in Japan. Tokyo is a prefecture. not a city. Dark Angel-REX 23:12, May 15, 2007 (JPN time)

The article on Tokyo calls it a "unique prefecture-level government entity" after the prefecture and city were merged. --Wafulz 14:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
The correct Japanese word for "city" in this case is toshi (都市), when Tokyo is compared to other cities. It is absolutely correct to say that Tokyo is the largest city (都市, toshi) in Japan.--Endroit 15:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Lock the page

I think we should lock the page ASAP. Its a featured article, and hence lot many people try to vandalize it! Abhask 19:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Today's featured article is a high visibility article that is a standard of brilliant prose and how open Misplaced Pages is. Many editors are monitoring the page for vandalism. It should not be protected; regardless, please help monitor the article for vandalism. We certainly welcome more help!  :-) --Iamunknown 19:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I disagree; articles on the main page should be protected. Sometimes there are things that most editors just don't see. For example, the flag of Japan was changed to the Confederate flag for nearly ten minutes before someone finally noticed it, and this was a pretty obvious error, especially since the picture on the front page is the real flag of Japan. It would not be good for Misplaced Pages's reputation if someone looking for the flag of Japan to come here and paste the wrong one into their report, thinking that there was no way there would be an error on a featured article on the main page. --730628 21:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Please see Misplaced Pages:Main Page featured article protection. Also, Misplaced Pages should never be used as a primary source of information, as Misplaced Pages content has no guarantee of its validity. --Slowking Man 21:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the information :) I was really helpful! Abhask 23:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Culture and recreation

I was looking for a place to insert some mention of karaoke, Japan's most popular leisure activity, but it was unclear whether to put it under "Culture" or "Sport and recreation", since it's arguably both (though not a sport, of course). And then I saw that the "Culture" section mentioned things like tea ceremony and flower arranging, which are done as hobbies for recreation in modern Japan. I've therefore made a go at merging these two sections into "Culture and recreation". Sports are arguably culture, and other country articles treat them in that section (see Cameroon, for example). — Brian (talk) 22:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Someone foolish enough to know the edit process tampered with the article. I will hopefully revert it back to normal. Salmans801

Official Name

Is the official name of Japan "State of Japan" or "Empire of Japan"? I couldn't find a reference to the official name. Inkan1969 00:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Technically, its neither. When you talk about the Empire of Japan, you're usually talking about pre-1947 Japan. --WoodElf 05:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
According to the CIA World Factbook, it's just "Japan", not "Republic of..." or "State of..." or anything like that. Shortest country name in the Factbook ^_^ LordAmeth 07:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


Wildlife

Why no one mention this? It's a great point.

  1. "Japan's Territorial Disputes". Indiana University. Retrieved 2007-03-28.
Categories: